MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2077389880 · doi:10.1109/btas.2009.5339014

Biometric authentication using augmented face and random projection

2009· article· en· W2077389880 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicBiometric Identification and Security
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsBiometricsComputer scienceRandom projectionSubspace topologyFace (sociological concept)Authentication (law)Artificial intelligenceProjection (relational algebra)Computer visionSimilarity (geometry)Facial recognition systemDomain (mathematical analysis)Pattern recognition (psychology)Image (mathematics)Computer securityMathematicsAlgorithm

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this paper, we propose a revocable and privacy preserving template of face biometrics based on random projection. The face biometric is augmented and simultaneously projected onto random subspace. The face image vector is augmented by adding the vector whose elements are varying with zero mean. The augmented face vector can provide better accuracy of authentication and privacy preservation. We analyze the similarity, privacy preserving and security properties of the proposed augmented face biometric information in the random projection-domain. To demonstrate the feasibility of the proposed method, detailed theoretical analysis and several experimental results are provided. The results show that our method is able to provide revocability and privacy preservation while offering better authentication accuracy and security.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.921
Threshold uncertainty score0.215

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.004
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.033
GPT teacher head0.288
Teacher spread0.255 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Quick stats

Citations4
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicBiometric Identification and SecurityFrench-language works237,207